Thoughts from London

One but the last straw
So the British Government is "concerned" at the LTTE acquiring some air capability. Well that is what Foreign Secretary Jack Straw is understood to have said when Lakshman Kadirgamar raised the issue in London a couple of weeks ago.

How nice of the British Government. How touching of Jack Straw, the politician who has made himself more presentable by shedding his spectacles for contact lenses and a more orderly hair.

Had Mr Straw's change in eye-glasses allowed him to see better the duplicitous nature of the Blair government's foreign policy and its double standards on issues such as terrorism, democracy, the rule of law and arms sales, one might have applauded his resort to contact lenses.

Those who have watched closely the political gyrations, the manoeuvres and volte face of the Blair administration which Jack Straw faithfully serves, it becomes even more evident that whatever changes he made to his viewing 'apparatus' they were only cosmetic. It might have made a difference to his looks, but it has made little or no difference to his outlook.

Take the case of the LTTE's "air capability", the term that has gained currency. Let's say for the sake or argument and to avoid unnecessary correspondence, that Straw did express concern. Perhaps he even said it was a serious matter.

But did he show surprise when Kadirgamar said the LTTE (which, mind you, the British Government banned as a terrorist organisation under the Terrorism Act 2000 when Straw himself was Home Secretary), had air capability?

Maybe Kadirgamar would be able to say whether Straw's demeanour, if not his words and tone, suggested surprise. One might bet all the blue sapphires in Sri Lanka to a single straw that the British foreign secretary already knew about it.

Not because his high commissioner in Colombo, Stephen Evans, would have dutifully passed on the information to Sri Lanka desk officer (the name is Bond - Simon Bond). He in turn would have passed it on to Tom Philips, head of the South Asia desk who would have briefed his minister.

Anyway they shouldn't have depended on Stephen Evans who, as Straw probably knows, was opposed to the banning of the LTTE when he was looking after South Asian affairs at the foreign office in London. Ask High Commissioner Evans to deny that if he could. Anyway all this would be out (as was done to weapons expert David Kelly who later committed suicide) under the Freedom of Information Act.

Unless the British foreign office and the country's intelligence services are terribly out of joint, the British Government should have known two to three years ago that the LTTE had acquired a helicopter and two light aircraft.

As I said when I first brought this to light last November, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) had in its publication "The Military Balance" 2003-2004, already stated in the clearest terms of the LTTE's acquisition.

This was repeated in its more recent edition "The Military Balance" 2004-2005 released in 2004. Even after I reported this on November 7 last year, our own authorities - political and security - do not appear to have taken much interest because all the heavy breathing, letter writing to foreign governments and hyped activity seem to have begun only more recently after air reconnaissance made some detections.

It also points to a lack of alertness by our London high commission's defence attaché at the time whose task it should have been to monitor terrorism-related developments here and report back to his bosses in Colombo. Unfortunately sometimes the official task is compromised by the unofficial responsibility of looking after the kith and kin of Sri Lankan politicians.

Our own failure to perform that critical task of monitoring, is one thing. The failure of the British Government to draw our attention to this development that, London now says, is a matter of deep concern, is another.

The International Institute of Strategic Studies, is based in London. It is considered an authoritative source, though its report on Iraq some days before the Blair government officially took the decision to go to war, was somewhat askew with regard to weapons of mass destruction.

Nevertheless its reports are read and studied by governments and intelligence services for the wealth of generally well-researched material IISS presents.

That goes for the British authorities too. The Military Balance, for instance, is edited by Colonel Christopher Langton supported by several defence analysts.

It would beggar belief if one were told that the British authorities -- intelligence and diplomatic -- were unaware what IISS had reported in its 2003-2004 publication. Not only did the IISS list the LTTE as a "Non-state armed group" but listed the World Tamil Association and the World Tamil Movement along with the LTTE, implying that they were front organisations of the Tigers.

Could Straw (read the British Government) say hand on heart say that British authorities were unaware that the LTTE had these aircraft?

To do so would be to admit that the relevant authorities had not made a study of the IISS's much-awaited annual publication. That would be a serious admission to make.

Now if the British authorities were aware -- and they should have been -- surely in the name of friendly relations etc, (all that spiel that is regurgitated when joint declarations and other statements are issued after high-level visits) should they not have brought it to the notice of the Sri Lankan High Commission here or to the Foreign Ministry in Colombo.

Admittedly we have failed in our appointed tasks. But we also depend on so-called friends, especially those who make such a public display of fighting terrorism and are quite ready and willing to lock up individuals without trial for years on mere suspicion.

Just the other day when the IRA, which the British call a terrorist organisation, murdered a man in Northern Ireland, the Blair government condemned outright such violence and criminality and even showed its anger at Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA.

Hundreds of people have been killed by the LTTE even after the ceasefire, many of them civilians and non-combatants. Have we heard a word of criticism or condemnation?

The other day Anton Balasingham, while denying a Sunday newspaper report that British intelligence leaned on him to have Rajasingham Jeyadevan released from LTTE torture, said that since coming to Britain in 1999, "I have had cordial relations with the authorities here." This, according to the pro-LTTE TamilNet.

In 2000 the LTTE was banned here and membership of a terrorist organisation or promoting its cause was made an offence. Balasingham has publicly addressed Tamil gatherings here at which he not only explained Prabhakaran's speeches but also espoused the LTTE cause. Money was collected for the LTTE, again violating the law.

So where is the justice in British justice, where is the much-wonted even-handedness? While people are locked up in prison or now placed under house arrest on mere suspicion of involvement in terrorism, a publicly avowed Tiger, an organisation that conscripts child soldiers in violation of UN treaties, is free to come and go as he pleases and espouse the cause of a terrorist organisation in violation of British law.

If the Blair government could so blatantly mislead (some say, quite rightly I think, it actually lied) its own people because of some crazy messianic streak in its leader, why should we expect anything better from a one-time colonial power that had a despicable history of double dealing and created several of the problems that Asian and African nations are still struggling to solve.

Back to Columns